See, it happened without asking :(

:(

About XPlane and nice graphics: I still have to see screenshots that make me go WOW... Everything I have seen so far doesn't impress me at all... It all looks so dull and lifeless: there seems to be even less sun in Xplane then there is in FSX...

In one of the threads I read recently someone posted a video of a night flight from Las Vegas in X-Plane. The lights certainly made me go wow. As for daylight shots though, I know what you mean.To respond to WindshearDK's questions:Aerosoft are currently busy porting their airports over to X-Plane, so more and more of those will be compatible. Also if you buy X-Plane via Aerosoft a couple of their airports are included.As for the flight physics, this is what I understand of the matter, but perhaps someone with more insight into the various codes can comment:X-Plane calculates the flight parameters via the 'blade element theory'. FSX uses a table look-up method. Let me illustrate what that means via an example:One of the crucial parameters when flying is obviously how much lift is being produced by your wing. This is determined by a number of factors, one of which is the lift coefficient. The lift coefficient is bascially a number that tells you how efficiently your wing is producing lift. The lift coefficient itself depends on the angle of attack; the angle between the chord line of your airfoil (wing) and the incoming airflow.Let's say you're flying at an angle of attack of 3.55 degrees and you want to know the lift coefficient.In X-Plane the program chops your wing up into several small pieces (blade elements) and then calculates the airflow over each piece to find the lift coefficient.In FSX the program looks in a table which has values of the lift coefficient (CL) for different angles of attack (AoA). Let's say the table says CL for an AoA of 3.5 is 1.2 and the CL for an AoA of 3.6 is 1.3 (numbers completely made up and not realistic). Then it will interpolate to find a CL of 1.25 at an AoA of 3.55 degrees.So which is the more accurate? Well, that depends. In principle the X-Plane method is more accurate, since it is not limited by the 'resolution' of the table. However everything stands and falls with the number of elements the wing is divided into. When designing a real aeroplane engineers use simliar methods to calculate the various properties of a wing. However in that case they do the calculations on a super-computer and let them run for several days before they get results. Even then wind-tunnel testing and even test flights are necessary to confirm the results. X-Plane has to run on a desk-top PC and the calculations have to be (near) real-time, that limits the accuracy. In contrast the table used by FSX can be built from real-world data.In the end (but this is only my best guess) I'd guess that X-Plane is more accurate for the average airplane, that is built by someone with limited knowledge of aeronautical engineering and who only has limited access to real-world data. If someone really knows what they're doing (e.g PMDG) on the other hand they can probably achieve a more accurate result with the FSX method (especially because it allows you to 'cheat' by tweaking the table to include other effects that would not be modelled by the blade element theory).Small side-note on the P3D backwards compatibility discussion, I've seen it mentioned that including Direct X 11 (due to happen soon or perhaps only in v2) would break most add-ons.

I suggest the OP is underestimating MS. I think everyone agrees they are ruthless, but apparently to different degrees. LM won't really care or matter, they can basically purchase or out engineer anything PMDG has to offer. The don't need PMDG's help to market UAV pilot training to Sri Lankan defense contractors. MS on the other hand; they droolingly watch you talk about your loyal fan base in the same way a really bad dude eyed France. When they court and then snub you, they are being coy, to say the least. I picture a shark bumping the diver's cage. They are sizing up the competetion, which they call "prey." One of the main specifications under which Flight was created was to capture the add-on market and in that regard it is not an experiment. PMDG is a shining example of what MS needs to own. A powerful company with tax obligations and dedicated followers, basically brought into existance by a "slip-up" on the part of MS. An embarassing mistake in the corporate world, perhaps glaring only to MS execs, like a pimple in the mirror, however, MS creates products to expand itself, not engender competetion. It is probably not something they will just allow to run it's own course, this whole "FSX thing."It might be prudent to not only expect further developments but also anticipate them..

Orbx are offering two ways of using their content in P3D:1) Side by side licence - This uses the files from the existing FSX orbx installtion to allow use in P3D. Non Commercial use - just pay $8.95 for the SBSL2) Full commercial licence for P3D - here you will be using Orbx products in a commercial situation where you will be making money - Licence costs $$$$$Why cant PMDG do the same as Orbx and offer the two ways of use?

Orbx are offering two ways of using their content in P3D:1) Side by side licence - This uses the files from the existing FSX orbx installtion to allow use in P3D. Non Commercial use - just pay $8.95 for the SBSL2) Full commercial licence for P3D - here you will be using Orbx products in a commercial situation where you will be making money - Licence costs $$$$$Why cant PMDG do the same as Orbx and offer the two ways of use?

First of all, be glad they don't because now you can fly the 737NGX in P3D if you want to without additional cost, with permission from PMDG! :( However, this works all fine now but may not work in a few months time... LM made clear that it won't stop development in order to guarantee 3rd party addons. If some addon suddenly doesn't work anymore, then that's bad luck. Of course devs can update their addons to work with a new version of P3D but then side by side licenses won't cut it anymore. Then we will have to pay big bucks to keep on using those addons. of course that may be fine with some but not with all.The main reason some devs are going the P3D-way is not because it's so nice for us simmers to maybe get a better sim, but because they can sell software that costs us 25 bucks for a few thousand bucks. :( And why PMDG doesn't do that... Maybe because their technology comes from companies like Boeing and they might not want them so sell it as a commercial product...? But now I am just guessing. Or: P3D is an opportunity for devs but right now the future is quite unsure and it will bring extra work and no one knows if it will pay off? We'll see what happens when PMDG does get into contact with LM the coming days.

Edited January 10, 201214 yr by J van E

If they chose to do that it would require writing up a whole new Eula & we've all seen how long it's taking to finalize the sdk's Eula, which in the sdk's case is probably only over the wording of a sentence or two.

I wrote MS an email about shutting out the Fltsim Community and this is what I recieved back:Thank you for contacting the Microsoft Flight development team. We have successfully received your message and will respond to your inquiry only as needed.For up to date information from the development team - please visit our website at http://www.microsoftflight.com or our Facebook page at http://www.facebook/msflight.Please note that this alias is for inquiries and feedback regarding Microsoft Flight. If you need assistance with products from the Flight Simulator franchise - please visit http://support.microsoft.com/.The Microsoft Flight TeamPlease note that Microsoft Flight is only able to offer e-mail support in English.*****Voice Your Opinion goto the Flight website and drop them a line*****

Thank You Robert for sharing your/Pmdg's thoughts about this.I will follow you whereever you develop it doesnt matter if its called x or y plane 9999.And Gents, please appreciate that Robert and pmdg shared with us this, so please dont hijack this topic.

+1 to what Laszlo said.I just wanna give another props to Robert for spending his late-late evening answering a lot of posts individually.

And when they hand you the $5,000 invoice on the way out the door- just... uhm... pay it... and we'll call it even. :(

You give me 10 hours block time in your Reno racer and then maybe I'll consider it :(...haha

Edited January 10, 201214 yr by Houghton11

If Microsoft tried to take over the addon market they will find it very difficult to do so since many of the developers we have today such as PMDG communicate with their customers and they have a general idea of what the FS community wants. While it is Microsofts right to do as they want with their products it's quite a shame that they have outrightly choosen to "bully" the competition. FSX is quite a good platform and it never ceases to amaze me how far it is come in terms of addons. I can't honestly see FLIGHT taking over the market for the next few years if at all. I am sure in the year 2018 there will still be FS9 and FSX users ( ok maybe not FS9 :) )FLIGHT has its target audience and to me it seem to be people who are not serious aviation enthusiast but simply someone who thinks planes are cool and they wouldn't mind having a fun game that's all about flying planes and doing cool missions blah blah blah.....Since the very first string of payware addons came on the market, I always wondered why Microsoft didn't notice that people wanted more than they had originally offered in their standard product. I guess it was only a matter of time since they caught on...the question is, did they catch on too late? Well I think they did. Considering that at present the percentage of FSX users who are willing to spend their money on FS addons have already put their trust and confidence in a select few developers, it will be extremely difficult for Microsoft to make money in the addon market. Developers such as PMDG and others have developed not just a customer base, but a loyal customer base which is based trust, quality and a feeling that the customers opinion really matters when it comes to the final outcome of a product.Even if MS develops addons and sells them at a cheaper price, sure ...there are folks who will buy it..but really the vast majority of serious simmers who require high end addons won't. Reasons?1. Customer loyalty2. PIRACY ( Sad but true....The only reason someone will illegally download a product is if they have no respect or take no avid interest in this wonderful hobby)

So let me get something right....

Pity you got it wrong... :(

Pity you got it wrong... :(

Sounded accurate to me. But who am I?

Pity you got it wrong... :(

Sounded accurate to me. But who am I?

Actually he got one thing wrong. He wrote "Toyota on wings" but it looks like a Honda on wings.

and a Toyota on wings

Lol!The thing that bugs me is that the A2A simulations are syaing the opposite to PMDG; they are not interested in X-plane. They say they reviewed X-plane 10 and it fell short of their requirements in every area.I love A2A aircraft, with Accusim. The engines are extremely well simulated and have many variables for damage and wear, and that damage stays when you shut down the simulator. Once you've experienced simulation at that level of realism its hard to go back to pistons engines on aircraft that don't have this kind of deep engineering modelling.So you see the problem - split in the developer community.

If you find yourself feeling emotionally charged while writing a reply- it is probably a good time to go out and get a cup of coffee (i recommend decaf, in the circumstances) and come back to it later... We're all on the same team here.

Well said!!!!!!!!P.S Wish I had the hardware to run fsx, id be all over your products PMDG. Maybe when this puter fries the next one will be good enough.P.S.S It dont bother me at all the I have no interst in Flight, heck Im still using FS9 and really enjoying it, Havnt even jumped into FSX, So when I do, It will be "NEW" to me :)Gerry Soulliere